1977 Bridgemen

[Scerpella]

This is fast approaching the status of urban myth. I have heard that there were something like 9 overage members marching with Bridgemen in 77. I have heard about the "ambiguity" over the rules but it occurs to me no one else suffered from the same misunderstanding.

Having said that, 78 Bridgemen were my favorite of the 2 years anyway!

[sarnia sam]

Here's a post that notes what happened, and that apparently there was some confusion over DCI's rules regarding the age limit. Wish someone could find a copy of the Bobby Hoffman interview John mentions, because that would probably clear up why there was confusion about the age-out rule: Re: 77 Bridgemen Part II

Hi Sue:

First, Merry Christmas to you and your family.

I do have all my copies of Drum Corps World and Drum Corps News from the 70s. they're in storage and difficult to get at, but I will at some future date go through them and find the relevant information from both the Hoffman and Pesceone interviews on the matter. It likely won't be until the warmer weather is back.

My memory of the situation is pretty clear, as it tends to be of many injustices, of which I believe Bridgemen suffered one. I recall Hoffman did state that DCI was informed, and Pesceone did deny they were. I find it difficult to believe a judge would issue an injunction if the rule was clear.

The age rule was changed that year. There were problems interpreting it on the part of a number of corps. Maybe there are some who were in corps management would could verify from their perspective. I can recall a number of people who wanted to march were left hanging for some time regarding their elegibility until someone at the DCI board or office sent word back to corps regarding each case.

Prior to that year there was a cut off date in June, which tended to rob many of a season. I don't recall the exact wording of the new rule, but, as I've said there were differences of interpretation.

The following year the rule was changed again with a cut off date of DCI finals. Somewhat clearer.

However it still, in my opinion, robbed people of a season. Case in point, my brother is clearly a year younger than me. His birthday is Aug. 19, mine Sept. 6.

We both had our last season in 1980. He lost his last season by one day. It was truly a sad day when DCI announced the date for the 81 championship when we were in Birmingham.

I cried when I learned that. He thought I was crying because I just aged out, but it was because I realized he just marched his last show and didn't even know it. The bright side was that we did it together, when if Optimist had still been going he would have been wearing yellow instead of blue.

I'm not sure what the rule is now, but I have read the Acheson interview and he uses both 21 and 22 as the cut off point. I think it would be much wiser to just have a rule that states the calendar year you turn 21 is your last season, period. That would solve a lot of problems. Why some 22 year olds get to march and others do not is a mystery to me.

Regards,

John Swartz

[byline]

Hi Sue:

First, Merry Christmas to you and your family.

Thanks, John! Same to you and your family! <santa>

And thank you for the background on the ever-changing age-out rule. I didn't realize it had gone through so many variations. No wonder people were confused!

I didn't know that story about your brother. *sigh* That is so sad! What a heartbreaking situation for you both. And yet, it did have its upside because at least the two of you got to march your last season together, in the same corps.

I always felt lucky that my birthday fell when it did. With it being in late November, there was never any question about when my last season would be. But for those folks whose 22nd birthday fell on the day of finals, or during finals week, or even at some point during the summer, my heart aches for them, because as you say, they really were deprived of a year. It was only because of a technicality in where their birthday fell that they were ineligible to march. But it's not like they were really that much older than the rest of us. :(

[Rocketman]

And you are correct, if the Bridgemen finished in the top 3 ,scores would not be announced. Could you imagine if they did finish in top 3 and DCI could not announce the scores of who won regardless who it was.

I'm sorry. What is your source for this statement? I had never heard that from anyone, or read it anywhere.

Rocketman - confused

ampssuck

[byline]

And you are correct, if the Bridgemen finished in the top 3 ,scores would not be announced. Could you imagine if they did finish in top 3 and DCI could not announce the scores of who won regardless who it was.

I'm sorry. What is your source for this statement? I had never heard that from anyone, or read it anywhere.

It's on this web page: A Bit of Bridgemen History

Scroll down about three-quarters of a way down the page to this section (right above the "That which does not kill us makes us stronger" quote by Frederick Nietsche):

The Bridgemen competed in DCI finals due to an agreement reached between the corps and DCI. The Bridgemen would compete, and the matter would be decided by arbitration at a later date. If the corps had placed higher than fourth, the top three scores would not have been announced until the matter had been through arbitration.

[lp1955]

OK here is my 2 cents on 77 DQ. I marched with the Bridgemen from 69-76 you would never know hom much I wanted to march in 77 i knew it was going to be a great year.But my Birthday is July 18th and I would have been 22. The 2 members in question was a misunderstanding between the Bridgemen and DCI on the cut off date for 22 year olds to march. When they were found out to be marching in error they were taken out of the corps and replaced. There should have been no DQ that year DCI just diden't want the Bridgemen to win.

Leo

[Malibu]

OK here is my 2 cents on 77 DQ. I marched with the Bridgemen from 69-76 you would never know hom much I wanted to march in 77 i knew it was going to be a great year.But my Birthday is July 18th and I would have been 22. The 2 members in question was a misunderstanding between the Bridgemen and DCI on the cut off date for 22 year olds to march. When they were found out to be marching in error they were taken out of the corps and replaced. There should have been no DQ that year DCI just diden't want the Bridgemen to win.

Leo

Leo, as much as I loved the '77 Bridgemen, there was NO WAY they would have won....I mean think about it. Blue Devils were like a well oiled machine and there was just no stopping them, not even by that awesome show Bridgemen had. Bridgemen had their hands full just trying to keep Phantom under hat. BD was at another level.

[TomKaye]

Thanks Leo & Malibu for your thoughts on this issue.

( great to see you last saturday BTW Leo. )

After 2 months of reading some inciteful; positive, negative & some inflammatory comments here, i feel compelled to add my own.

NO other corps deserved to beat BD 1977 --- they were worthy champions.

NO deliberate attempt was made by the Bridgemen 77 to subvert what was ( at that time ) an ambiguous age rule.

Neither Hoffman nor Pesceone are around to defend or clarify what was said to whom, by whom, but as you know Leo,--- 2 members marched who turned 22 the first week of August. ( not 9 nor 15, nor 20 as some have speculated & rumored)

Why you, who turned 22 in July could not march that year, and two whose birthdays were in August, 3 weeks later than yours, did,.....speaks to the ambiguity of DCI's own rule. Talk about confusion.....yikes, ....but again not a deliberate attempt to subvert the rule and jeopardize 126 others ......

Replacements for both travelled on tour that year, just in case the Bmen interpretation of the age rule was incorrect. Both were replaced weeks prior to prelims & finals, and according to DCI no sanctions would occur for them having marched previously that summer.

Everyone can imagine the chaos & disruption that occurred finals week when DCI

reversed its position and announced our disqualification.

128 kids, (and they were kids, which is what our activity is supposedly about) plus staff & admin couldn't eat, couldn't sleep, couldn't focus............

Couldn't focus that is until Prelims (3rd) and Finals ( 4th ) pending litigation / arbitration.

Was there a DCI conspiracy to slot the Bridgemen 4th in Finals regardless of their performance that nite ?? i kinda doubt it, but ..... ??

Could the Bridgemen have achieved a 2nd or 3rd place '77 finish absent the disruption ?? possible..even probable, but i won't speculate anymore.

NONE OF US WILL EVER KNOW.

Bottom-line is an unjust disqualification inhibited our corps' ability to ENTERTAIN

and COMPETE with the highest quality levels in drum corps that year.

26 years later, hopefully we can let this die.

Entertainment, Competition, Camaraderie, Friendship, Family Values.........

Isn't that what our activity is supposedly all about ?

Congratulations BD on your well-deserved 77 DCI Championship..among your ten others..............You Guys are a Class Act.

Peace, Health, Happiness & success in 2004 to all in our Drum Corps Fraternity...

Tom K.

A Bridgemen Alumnus

[byline]

Thank you, Tom, for such a gracious post. That pretty much says it all. Hopefully what you've written will answer all the questions, and put an end to the speculation. For now, anyway. :)

[lucas97]

Not really. But I'll leave it alone. :)